good morning. welcome to "this week." the fallout. >> i got the ambassador on the other end. he said, greg, we're under attack. >> new hearings and new revelations on benghazi. is it a political cover-up? >> the white house has done everything possible to block access. >> or politics as usual? >> republicans have chosen to politicize this. >> will it hurt the president? or hillary clinton? we'll ask our headliners, senators john mccain and jack reed. plus -- >> i don't make decisions based on perceives. >> obama's red line on syria. >> this is a hell of a lot more important to me than running for president. chris christie's surprise. and on this mother's day -- >> you all set?

>> top moms in congress, in our "sunday spotlight." >> we have a woman's bathroom right off the floor. >> first time? >> first time in 200 years. hello again. george is off today. great to have you with us. the political storm over benghazi is brewing anew this morning. the obama administration on the defensive, after abc news obtained e-mails showing extensive edits to the disputed talking points issued after the attack. when one version suggested al qaeda affiliates took part and the cia warned of threats, secretary clinton's spokesperson objected. writing that could be abused by members of congress to beat up the state department for not paying attention to warnings. so, why would we want to feed that? friday, my colleague, chief white house correspondent, jon karl, who exclusively obtained

house spokesperson, jay carney. >> the original version included references to al qaeda. those were taken out, after the cia wrote its initial draft. >> and the cia wrote another draft at the -- >> based on input from the state department. >> here's what i'm saying, jon -- >> do you deny that? >> no. there's an interagency process, which is always the case. the effort here by republicans to find some hidden mystery, comes to nothing because the president called it an act of terror. >> joining us now, republican senator john mccain. nice to have you here, senator mccain. what do you make of the white house response? >> can i pick up on what you showed mr. carney say. the president didn't call it an act of terror. in fact, two weeks later, before the u.n., he was talking about hateful videos and spontaneous demonstrati demonstration. >> i think the white house will probably say there was the remark that it was a terror attack.

it did seem rather indirect. >> what he did say the day after, he condemned acts of terrorism. but then that night, with -- i think it was "60 minutes" interview, i'm not sure. and throughout the next two weeks, he kept saying it was caused by a spontaneous demonstration, sparked by a hateful video. he kept saying that over and over again. and condemning that. you have to look at this in the context of the times there. they're in the midst of a presidential campaign. the narrative by the obama campaign is, bin laden is dead. al qaeda's on the run. not to worry about anything. and here comes this attack on benghazi. and there's so many questions that are unanswered. we need a select committee. but for the president's spokesman to say, that, well, there was only words or technical changes made in those e-mails is a flatout untruth. i like mr. carney. but that's not acceptable for the president's spokesman to say

that to the american people, when we now know, any reference to act of terror, any reference to al qaeda were removed from the talking points. and it was done at a deputy's meeting just before susan rice went on television. >> would you call this a cover-up? >> i would call it a cover-up. i would call it a cover-up in the extent that there was willful removal of information, which was obvious. it was obvious. mr. hicks said, in his testimony, his jaw dropped when he saw susan rice do that. i was on another sunday morning show after susan rice. my jaw dropped. i said, people don't bring rocket-propelled grenades and mortars to spontaneous demonstrations. >> let's look at what happened because of the e-mails. first of all, ambassador tom pickering said the idea of a cover-up is absurd.

congressman steven king, republican from iowa, said it was bigger than watergate. and this is what james inhofe said. >> using the "i" word before too long. >> "i" word meaning impeachment? >> yeah. in all of the great cover-ups in history. the pentagon papers, iran-contra, watergate and all the rest of them, this is going to go down as the most serious, most egregious cover-up in american history. >> with all due respect, i think this is a serious issue. i will even give the president the benefit of the doubt on some of these things. we need a select committee. we need a select committee -- >> do you blame hillary clinton? >> i think the secretary of state has played a role in this. >> you think she had a role in those e-mails? >> she had to have been in the loop some way. but we don't know for sure. but i do know that her response before the foreign relations committee, who cares -- she says, who cares how this happened? in a rather emotional way.

a lot of people care, i say with respect to the secretary of state. >> would you like to see her back on the hill testifying again? >> oh, sure. we need a select committee that interviews everybody. i don't know what level of scandal, unquote, this rises to. but i know it rises to the level where it requires a full and complete ventilation of these facts. now, here we are, nine months later. and we're still uncovering information, which, frankly, contradicts the original line that the administration took. and so, we need the select committee. and i hope we'll get it. and the american people deserve it. >> just quickly, i want to go back to the testimony of gregory hicks. he talked about bringing military assets in. bringing planes in. the military says that wasn't possible. do you agree with the fact that it wasn't possible?

>> i cannot find -- i find it impossible to comprehend why on september 11th, the day we all know is so important, when there's been numerous warnings about the security at that consulate, that we didn't have forces that were capable of doing so. and over a 7 1/2-hour period with all the assets we have in the region, we couldn't have an f-16 at low altitude fly over those people who were attacking our consulate? and another question is, why weren't there forces capable of going to defend that consulate? >> i want to move on to syria. it's been more than a week since israeli jets hit targets in syria. more than two weeks since the u.s. said that there was evidence of the use of chemical weapons. what should be happening now concerning especially these chemical weapons and the red line that the president talked about? >> well, the president said he wants a u.n. investigation. the only problem with that is, the u.n. can't get into syria. >> and we read this morning that

assad's forces are making incredible gains. you talked about, a no-fly zone striking targets. what good does that do? >> well, first of all, it engages their air assets. that kind of terrain and that kind of weather, air is a decisive factor in this kind of -- >> decisive factor in doing what? >> we establish the no-fly -- no american boots on the ground. >> that's still a lot of risk, taking up that air. the russians said they would move in anti-aircraft -- >> if they move that in, it's going to make it more complicated and certainly, maybe, gives us a little bit of skepticism about a conference. but we can provide them with a safe zone. we can provide them with a place to organize inside syria. we can give them the heavy weapons they need. >> who is them? who is them? >> i know them. i met them. they're there.

>> how do you keep out good rebels and bad rebels? you have al qaeda rebels running around. >> these are legitimate questions you're asking. but they are there. and you put them inside syria. then, they have benghazi. a place to organize, to identify the right people. the jihadists, there aren't that many of them. they're just so good because they've been fighting all over the middle east all these years and they're not afraid to die. we could still organize a legitimate and nonjihadist group that are already there. they have a great general. they have a fine man who is in charge of the syrian national council. look, we can do this. >> everybody i talked to said they can't possibly vet all of them. >> they said they couldn't penetrate without great costs, syrian air differences. didn't the israelis blow a hole a mile wide in that? >> i'm not sure they went into syria. are you sure they went into there? >> i'm sure they took out assets of assad's in syria, which is

what we could do with cruise missiles and patriot missiles. so, that obviously blows a hole a mile wide in our joint chiefs of staff, who prove again, you don't want to do something, they can find reasons not to do it. either, you have two choices. either let this continue, as you just mentioned. hezbollah is now all-in. and the initiative is now on the side of bashar al assad. you can do that or you can go in and give them a safe zone and give them the weapons that they need and the help they need. and stop this unconscionable slaughter. and the president by saying red line -- he gave a green light to all of the massacres. it's a shameful chapter in american history. >> thank you for joining us, senator mccain. and joining us now, rhode island democrat, senator jack reed. you heard senator mccain call benghazi and those e-mails a cover-up. >> absolutely not. the congress has had 11 hearings

on the topic. over 25,000 pieces of documentation, to congress. in fact, the e-mails in question, are available in february in the context of the john brennan confirmation hearing. and more critical i think is two of the most respected americans, ambassador thomas pickering and former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, mike mullen, conducted a thorough report, assessing -- >> they did not look at those e-mails. and thomas pickering told abc news you have to be naive to leave that politics was not injected in some role. >> i would suggest that looking at the play-by-play, that what was going on was not so much the politics of election year, but the institutional positioning. victoria nuland, who was representing the state department, had a long career of public service. she's not a partisan. she worked for dick cheney.

she was very much interested in making sure that the state department's position and their perception -- >> you're saying this is an interagency problem? >> i think this is a classic issue of interagencies battle about who will say what. and at the end, i think what you have a very sort of consensus document that avoided all of the difficult issues. >> it's acceptable for jay carney to originally say there was just one, small change in this? and then, we find 12 different versions, including a very definitive statement. we do know that islamic extremists with ties to al qaeda, participated in the attack. that did not appear in there. that's acceptable? >> that did not appear. when i recall ambassador rice was having interviewed on one of the tv shows. she essentially said there were extreme settlements. she did not contradict that. the president's statement immediately after the events, i think a day after the event, was this was an act of terror.

there's no attempt as i think my colleague suggested that there was a story being created that there was no terrorist involvement. that terrorism was not at all an issue. i think what was being debated and seriously, again, just a month ago. jim clapper, the head of the intelligence community in the united states, based on his view as a professional all these years, those comments were about as fair -- >> let me go back to the act of terror you say president obama talked about the next day in the rose garden. and that senator mccain disputed. if the president said it was an act of terror, why didn't that appear on the talking points? can the white house really have it both ways? that they say, he said act of terror. but a few days later, they take out the references. they felt confident about it if they sent the president out to say that. >> they created, through process, a document that everyone could agree upon.

that's almost by definition in washington, something that is not as specific or conclusive. >> so, what they did is acceptable to you? >> what they did, i think, was try in a very chaotic situation, to come up with points that they felt confident of. they didn't want to go too far in two concepts. one, our intelligence resources or assets you might not want to disclose. second, the ongoing investigation was just beginning. those two factors also frame the response. i think again, when you talk about this sort of political dynamic, when the president comes out and says quite quickly, with the authority of his office, this was an act of terror, the notion that we're somehow trying to disguise it and make it something else, i think falls away very quickly. >> i want to move quickly to syria. you heard senator mccain, he's been saying it for weeks, there should be a no-fly zone. would that really work? do we really know who these rebels are? >> we don't have a good sense of who is on the ground and the

cohesion of elements that we have been trying to support over many months. and a no-fly zone is a -- could be feasible from an operational standpoint. but i think -- >> what would it accomplish? >> it might accomplish very little, in fact. with artillery, you can fire on innocent civilians and rebels. with armored personnel carriers, you can move forward, displaced troops and they can go after civilians on the ground. it might not accomplish a great deal. but it would give us a step further to our engagement in a very complicated civil war. i think the best approach is a diplomatic approach at this point. i know it's many times poo-pooed as well. that's the old diplomacy working. but engaging and secretary kerry has made a step with the russians to get them to sit down. >> i want to go quickly to the red line. it's been two weeks since the united states said there was evidence that the syrian regime used chemical weapons.

we've done nothing. i know they're checking out chain of custody. but it seems like this could go on forever. and we may not do anything. should the president do something since they appear to have used chemical weapons? >> i think we have to take it very seriously. we have to be careful, though. we've had situations in the past where we've acted on information that was incomplete, impartial and frankly, to the detriment of our country and national security. we have to be careful. there's several issues here. >> should he have drawn that red line? very quickly. >> he should have made it clear, as he did, that the use -- the systemic use of chemical weapons, against the syrian people is something the international community cannot tolerate. so, that point has to be. now, the question is, what do you do? you can't do it hastily. but you have to do it very deliberately. that's what i believe the president is trying to do. >> thanks for joining us this morning, senator reed. up next, more on benghazi with our roundtable. broke the story of

e-mails. he's here with new details in 90 seconds. [ woman ] i don't know. i just can't imagine that retiring some day is even an option for sean and me. how'd you get comfortable enough to know you could really do it? well, planning, of course. and we got a lot of good advice. a few years ago, your mom and i put some money into a pacific life fixed annuity. it guarantees us an income for the rest of our lives, whether social security is all there or not. hey, hey! ♪ [ laughs ] [ male announcer ] to learn more about a guaranteed lifetime income from pacific life, visit pacificlife.com.

a guaranteed lifetime income from pacific life, so you can capture your receipts, ink for all business purchases. and manage them online with jot, the latest app from ink. so you can spend less time doing paperwork. and more time doing paperwork. ink from chase. so you can. the fact is, we have four dead americans. whether it's because of protests or guys out for a walk decided to kill some americans. what difference at this point does it make?

>> the committee labors to find out what happened prior, during and after the attack matter. it matters to me personally. and it matters to my colleagues. >> scenes from two emotional hearings on benghazi, including one this week. let's introduce our roundtable. george will, "washington post" columnist, ruth marcus. general james cartwright, former vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, and abc news white house correspondent, jon karl. jon, you broke the story this week of the e-mails. what's the fallout? >> clearly, there's a credibility question that the white house has to deal with because it directly contradicts what they have said about this. but you mentioned in the interview with senator reed, that the white house has had tried to have it both ways. saying they immediately called it an act of terror. and saying they couldn't do it in these talking points because they couldn't prejudice the investigation. there's problems on both sides .

but one very important point here. all 12 reinvestigations of the talking points, originally drafted by the cia, they begin benghazi started by a reaction to cairo. that was false. they took out all of the al qaeda references. >> they say they didn't know that at the time. how about cia director david petraeus? how did he respond to the talking points? i know you have new information on that. >> this is fascinating. mike morrell, who was the deputy director, signed off on this one. petraeus finally saw the final version of the talking points, this is the saturday afternoon before susan rice's appearances on the sunday shows. he looks at these and says they're essentially useless. and direct quote from his e-mail. he says, i would just as soon not use them. but it's their call, meaning the white house's call. >> and they got the talking points out there. george will, is this going to last?

is this going to have a lasting effect as an unacceptable way to do business at the white house? >> a week ago, mr. carney, who's usefulness to this administration is diminishing quickly, he said, a week ago, it was a long time ago. this is a live issue. we know three things. mr. hicks, the night of the attack, speaking from libya, said pretty much what it was. an armed interaction. not a movie review conducted with rocket-propelled grenades and mortars. five days later on this morning and on four other sunday morning programs, the idea of a boisterous movie review was still the administration's position. and then, 14 days after the attack, at the u.n., it was the same thing. we started out with three arguments. was security lax in benghazi? demonstrably. could forces have been there to rescue them? doubtful. has the nation been systemically misled?

certainly. now, we need a select committee in congress because the state department's misnamed accountability review board neglected to interview even the secretary of state. >> you think secretary clinton will be back on the hill? >> and possibly some of her aides. cheryl mills, for example, her chief of staff, who dressed down greg hicks, after he spoke to a congressman without a lawyer/minder present. i think it's important to go back to some first principles. and george alluded to some of them. the real scandal is what that accountability review board found, was that security was grossly inadequate and there was systemic failures of leadership. the notion this is an impeachable offense, i thought senator mccain was right in saying that that rhetoric has gone way, way too far. there's a real scandal. and then, there's a manufactured scandal. by manufactured, i mean that the white house has given the

building blocks of the manufacture to its opponents. i don't understand what it was thinking when it failed to understand -- failed to say the act of terror clearly. failed to get the story straight. and then, the comments by jay carney, as you say, are demonstrably false, that no single syllable was changed except for this one word. not true. >> general cartwright, i want to ask you practical questions here. one of the things the committee, the review board, rather, was whether they could have gotten assets in there. whether they could have gotten airplanes in there. you heard senator mccain say why didn't they shoot a fighter jet over the area to warn them. was that feasible? and if not, why not? >> it probably wasn't feasible. i don't know the exact conditions. but to get an aircraft ready, to get crews ready, to get maintenance people out. you don't walk up to one of these and put the keys in.

to provide ordinance to defend themselves. and then, find the route down there, to get the clearances to go in. that's a day or two of activity. we've heard a couple of different estimates from a couple of hours. that's the flight time to get there. and then, we've heard 9 to 20 hours to have the aircraft actually make it. that's talking about getting them ready and getting people in position. >> is there something to be said that they didn't have anything ready, in an area like libya? in an area that was still hot? >> and i think that's where the review committee, mike mullen, and tom pickering, took a look at. were the measures that were available at the embassy itself sufficient? and were the measures of the forces that could come to the aid of some kind of an infraction, whether it be an ied, an explosive device, or whether it be an attack on the embassy or its people? those types of capability were pein northern italy.es, in were the were they ready enough to do

that? that's worth going back and reviewing. >> i want to move to syria. you heard all of the talk about red lines. ruth, should the president have had made a red line with syria? i mean, is his credibility seriously hurt here if he does nothing? >> if he does nothing. i do think we should watch that space. it's not yet clear that nothing will be done. but it is also clear, look. every parent knows, if you're going to make a threat, you need to be willing to follow through on it or else you lose credibility. not just with the child that you're threatening, but with the other kids you have in your family. in this case, iran is watching. and so, he said red line. he is now looking for, to some extent, the witch's broomstick, to switch metaphors to "the wizard of oz" in terms of absolute proof and chain of

custody. if there is adequate proof and no consequence, there's a big loss of credibility. that's not to say it's an easy choice. the consequences are all unpleasant. something he should have thought of months ago. >> hanging over all of this is the failure in iraq. and this president is not going to go get involved in a significant way militarily in the middle east in a war over intelligence on wmd. i talked to a senior official in the white house about this. the intelligence, chemical weapons was used. it's solid. but you know what? it's not as solid as the intelligence that iraq had weapons of mass destruction. >> general cartwright, let me go to you on this. you heard john mccain say the military can always find a way not to do something if they don't want to do it. and the military does not want to put up a no-fly zone. doesn't think it would wk. why wouldn't it work? >> the question is, why do you want a no-fly zone? to do what?

a no-fly zone in and of itself is probably not going to change the dynamic drastically. >> sometimes when you're trying to stop the killing, you have more killing. >> you have more killing. they might be able to reduce the amount of offensive air that assad is able to muster against the rebels. that would be potentially what a no-fly zone could do. but a no-fly zone might enable -- and this might be where senator mccain is going, getting rid of runways and air defenses. that's a slippery slope. if you convince -- >> a slippery slope, george? >> it is. >> it seems that you're absolutely right. there's an illusion here that a superpower can tiptoe on little cats feet into a sectarian civil war and not change the dynamic fundamentally. as soon as we intervene, we are the chief protagonist. the secretary of state,

mr. kerry's policy, it seems to me, to get a negotiated transition of power. there's two problems with this. assad isn't interested. he doesn't want to go anywhere. and the other side isn't interested. and the russians, who have to be involved in this, aren't interested. no one's interested in our policy. so, we fall back on the illusion that some surgical, tiny intervention can be kept surgical and tiny. and that's dangerous. >> we'll leave it at that, george will. thanks to ruth and general cartwright. george and jon join our next panel, including senator olympia snowe. she reveals a plan to fix our broken politics. plus, the irs under fire for targeting conservatives. and chris christie's stunning announcement. that's next. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art. [ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there.

call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better. ♪ help the gulf recover, andnt to. learn from what happenedg goals: so we could be a better, safer energy company. i've been with bp for 24 years. i was part of the team that helped deliver on our commitments to the gulf - and i can tell you, safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge safety equipment and technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all our drilling activity, twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. safety is a vital part of bp's commitment to america - and to the nearly 250,000 people who work with us here. we invest more in the u.s. than anywhere else in the world. over fifty-five billion dollars here in the last five years - making bp america's largest energy investor.

our commitment has never been stronger. welwhere new york state is... investing one billion dollars to attract and grow business. where companies like geico are investing in technology & finance. welcome to the state where cutting taxes for business... is our business. welcome to the new buffalo. welcome to the new buffalo.

welcome to the new buffalo. new york state is throwing out the old rule book to give your business a new edge, the edge you can only get in new york state. to grow our start your business, visit thenewny.com otherworldly things. but there are some things i've never seen before. this ge jet engine can understand 5,000 data samples per second. which is good for business. because planes use less fuel, spend less time on the ground and more time in the air. suddenly, faraway places don't seem so...far away. ♪

the roundtable's next. first, mark sanford is headed to congress. so, what does stephen colbert make of his sister's defeat? >> what can i say? the voters of south carolina have spoken. mark sanford beat my sister. and i believe that means mark sanford is now my sister. from now on, and i never thought i would ever say this, i am from north carolina. i'm the next american success story. working for a company

where over seventy-five percent of store management started as hourly associates. there's opportunity here. i can use walmart's education benefits to get a degree, maybe work in it, or be an engineer, helping walmart conserve energy. even today, when our store does well, i earn quarterly bonuses. when people look at me, i hope they see someone working their way up. vo: opportunity, that's the real walmart.

all stations come over to mithis is for real this time. step seven point two one two. verify and lock. command is locked. five seconds. three, two, one. standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers.

the president got it out of the hole for me. he signed the flag. everybody signed the flag. and it was pretty neat. >> did he ask for your vote on immigration reform in return? >> actually, i told him since i made a hole in one, he ought to give us everything we want on entitlement reform. >> republican senator saxby chambliss hit a hole in one with president obama this week. so, a little golf and washington gridlock? we'll get to that in a moment. let's introduce our next roundtable. george will and jon karl are back with democratic strategist donna brazile. abc's matthew dowd. and former senator from maine, olympia snowe. welcome to all of you. i want to start with you, george will and the irs. what a week for the irs. look at these headlines. irs targeted tea party groups

for scrutiny. searching words like patriot, tea party. does this sound like a familiar story to you, george will? >> mr. hicks, when he was in libya, said his jaw dropped at the explanation back here. this was a jaw-dropping moment. in response to a question, at american bar association convention, a second-level irs person said we did target these people. not progressive. >> apparently, they've known about for a while. >> the tea party people have known about this. and working on this. >> and the irs? >> they said it was, just some odd underlings out in cincinnati that did this. and no political motive whatever involved. the question is, how stupid do they think we are? just imagine, donna brazile, if the george w. bush administration had an irs underlings, he's out in cincinnati, of course, saying we're going to target groups with the word progressive in their title. we'd have all hell breaking loose.

may i read you something from an ancient document? >> i would be surprised if you didn't. >> this is the 40th anniversary of the watergate summary here in washington. he has through his subordinates and agents endeavored to cause the violation of rights in citizens. income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner, section 1, article 2, the impeachment articles of richard nixon. >> over to you, donna brazile. >> i think it would be irresponsible talking about impeachment. the i.g. for tax administration will release a report this week. there's already been some leaked documents. clearly there was incompetence at some level of bureaucrats, looking into all these allegations. coming in to see whether or not there were legitimate organizations with the word tea party or patriot in it. there are progressive patriots,

as well. but the truth is, this was -- this was something that should have been revealed, should have been told. there were numerous congressional hearings. no one came forth. the irs official put it out there. now, let's see what the investigation yields. >> why wasn't it revealed long ago? >> we know the irs leadership, at least i'm told, in washington, knew about this, last year. and yet, the commissioner of the irs testified that he had no idea. no information this was going on. i think to what george just said, you better get ready for your audit. >> the irs commissioner was a republican, appointed by bush, who -- his term expired in november. there's a vacancy currently at the irs in terms of the head of the irs. >> does this go away? >> no, it doesn't, until it's resolved and get to the heart of the matter. the irs has sweeping powers.

and the fact that it had gone on so long, wasn't disclosed or revealed in any way and was denied. when the former commissioner came, he denied it. he was specifically asked. and many attempts by members of congress that they were specifically targeted. they said no. >> you're smiling, matt dowd. you know you're not going to -- >> i'm going to go for it. i don't have enough to go after anyway. this is so -- everything about this is so typical washington and so typical partisan on each side of it. there's a great quote by napoleon, never ascribe to malice that can be easily contributed to incompetence. i'm not saying there's not stuff involved that has to be explained. and benghazi is another example. we jump to scandal long before we settle on stupidity. and they shouldn't have done certain things. i'm amazed at a situation, especially on the republican and

conservative side of this, who constantly say government's incompetent. they can't do anything. but if barack obama wants to make it work badly on their behalf, th can do it really well and really effectively. >> that's a perfect transition to what kind of week we have. we saw the hole in one with saxby chambliss. we saw him out there with president obama. i want to start with you, senator snowe, on this. you are the author of the book, "fighting for common ground." you say the senate is no longer a legislative body where the key issues facing the country could be resolved. the senate as a whole simply was not doing the job granted to it under the constitution. first of all, it caused you to leave the senate. and what can we do about the problems we're having now? why does the hole in one make a difference? >> well, to some, it probably really does. the golfers. but i think it's important for the president to build those relationships, i should say. but i decided to take my fight ou ting a different direction on the outside to affirm people's views.

one, about disturbing partisanship and pollerization that exists in the congress. the only way to change it is placing a premium on partisanship. and compelling people to come together. and through the bipartisan policies, where i'm a senior fellow, we're launching, tomorrow a common ground project in conjunction with citizens of political perform, can serve as a catalyst for real-time involvement, drawing people into the process and making and holding members of congress accountable for reaching agreement and common ground options. >> you see that working, george will? >> no. and i'm not sure i want it to work. i think senator snowe on that side of the table and i on this side represent a fundamental divide in 200-some years in this country. >> i'm not that old. >> maybe combined, the whole table is.

>> i think senator snowe wishes the american people were less cynical about washington and more trusting. with regard to our last topic of the irs, i wish americans were less trusting of government than they are. we wouldn't have the sprawling government, which by its very size, guarantees the kind of gridlock that senator snowe dislikes. >> let's take a leap forward here in our last topic here. 2016. we heard about benghazi. this weekend, we had senator rand paul in iowa. we had governor bobby jindal in new hampshire. and this, we heard from governor chris christie. >> i did this for myself, my wife, and my children. and unlike some of you, they will still pay attention to me whether i run for president or not. >> you buy that one? you've run presidential campaigns. >> i don't think he gained weight after he became governor of new jersey and decided it's

time to lose weight. you take his explanation as valid of what he says. i think so much of what's going on now, with the presidential campaign in 2016, started right after november 2012. that's when the presidential election for 2016. and for me, all of this, so much of the discussion, the release of the ad on benghazi, has to do with 2016 and try to hurt hillary clinton. all of the scandals, all have to do with 2016. the interesting thing to me, if hillary clinton doesn't run, this will be the first time in more than a generation, where both parties have no heir apparent to run for this office. before 1960, this is -- since 1960, this hasn't happened before. that's why everything you're seeing is about 2016. >> i want to go back to chris christie for a moment. would americans have to have someone that wasn't overweight? >> so much of america is overweight. >> more than one-third of americans consider themselves, you know, overweight. more than one-third, obese. we all struggle with our weight.

george, i know you haven't struggled. i haven't seen you in four years. and you haven't struggled with much. but the truth is, i'm rooting for him. i think he's doing the right thing, not just for his health, his family. whether it's 2016 and he's shaping up for that. it humanizes him. but it gives him an opportunity to share with the american people, like bill clinton, when he ran for president, was struggling with his weight. he was one happy meal away from being overweight. mike huckabee, who struggled with his weight. this gives him an opportunity to talk to the american people about a subject we should all talk about, our own health. >> will it hurt? >> the republicans are treating hillary like she is the democratic nominee in 2016. >> joe biden is having a great time by himself. >> i'm over here. i'm joe biden. i'm here. but look. we've seen two ads last week, from republican groups, video ads, attacking hillary clinton. these are the earliest attack ads we have seen, i think ever. >> but we said, it's a long way way away.

does that issue fade? or is this going to be a central issue with hillary clinton? >> the idea we can say what's going to be a central issue in 3 1/2 years, there's no way. but i do believe that we will see that clip in one form or another in political attack ads in the 2016 election. >> i think it undermines -- what it does is undermines her. not only with the general electorate. here we go again. i think democrats are going to start to say, do we want to relitigate all of the stuff we had from her husband because here we go. we have another thing. the only thing i counsel, is republicans better be careful what they wish for. as of right now, she's strong. you get rid of her and joe biden has a hard time going anywhere, a new candidate could emerge. and that could be harder to beat than hillary clinton. be careful what you wish for. >> on this whole issue recording hillary and on benghazi, you know, republicans could overpla. we can't be viewed as doing this for political reasons but rather

trying to get at the truth. it should be a bipartisan effort on both sides, democrats and republicans, to get to the heart of the matter, what transpired in benghazi. why were there serious lapses in security and measures not put in place to respond to those issues? >> i want to quickly here at the end, we just have a couple minutes, talk about this week's hearings on military sexual assault. it is an unbelievable problem. and i'm going to say right now, i heard for 20 years, officials at the pentagon say they have zero tolerance for this. and it's worst than ever. matt, you have a son -- >> i have a son that served in the army and was in iraq for almost 18 months. it's a problem. and a systemic problem. he talks about it. he talked about it. it goes on all the time. to me and today's mother's day. happy mother's day to you and all the other mothers. there's a quote, how we treat our prisoners is how civilized our society is.

to me, it's how we treat women is how civilized our society is. when we allow abuse. we don't report it. police don't investigate it. what we saw come out of cleveland, with the guy had a history of abuse that nothing was done about. and then, look what happened. the military has not dealt with this. >> just a couple of seconds here, george. >> i agree with. when you have a 37% increase from one year to another, something has changed also in the reporting of this. and that's part of the story. >> you also got to look at alcohol. that's something else you have to look at. and whether that is a contributing factor. and i'm sure they'll look at that as they go forward and try to finally fix this problem. senator snowe is sticking around to answer your questions for our web extra. coming up, our mother's day spotlight. having a baby while serving in congress isn't easy. >> when he was a baby, i had him on the floor. and i was voting. and my son vomited right down my

blouse. and i was wearing a suit with a silk blouse which was a mess. and i still had to stay for a vote. you can imagine how unique that situation was. ameriprise advisors can help you like they've helped millions of others. to help you retire your way, with confidence. ♪ that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you. let's get to work. ameriprise financial. more within reach. [ whirring ] [ dog barks ] i want to treat more dogs. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art. [ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there.

call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better. ♪ [ agent smith ] i've found software that intrigues me. it appears it's an agent of good. ♪ [ agent smith ] ge software connects patients to nurses to the right machines

while dramatically reducing waiting time. [ telephone ringing ] now a waiting room is just a room. [ static warbles ] "the sunday spotlight" next. first "the sunday funnies." >> some experts are saying the 2016 presidential primary could come down to hillary clinton and joe biden. biden is calling her a worthy opponent. and hillary's calling him practice. south korean president, park geun-hye is in the united states right now, at the white house right now. some reason, this is the picture south korea's largest news organization published of that meeting. they took two different photos. and pieced them together. even manti te'o said this is totally fake. all business purchases.

so you can capture your receipts, and manage them online with jot, the latest app from ink. so you can spend less time doing paperwork. and more time doing paperwork. ink from chase. so you can.

it's so hard to say nothing but congratulations. babies aren't part of it. even those who we do not agree on policy are so excited because they recognize, this is a great thing.

>> yes, it is. congresswoman jamie herrera beutler with exciting news this week. she's becoming the ninth member of congress to have a baby in office. so, this mother's day, our spotlight shines on three of those women. senator kirsten gillibrand and congresswoman cathy mcmorris rodgers. >> probably the best piece of advice i can give to women trying to juggle career and family, is you really have to learn to be forgiving of your own self. when you have a lot of balls in the air, this is what i tell women, inevitably, one or two are going to fall. and you can't beat yourself up about it. >> there's some days that i think, okay. i have this figured out. and the next day, it's all falling apart. it's good to be able to talk with other working moms on capitol hill, that can understand and relate to you

and give you those words of encouragement. >> i want more women in government. members of congress. even though we shouldn't have to be the bears of the issues, we passionately are because we see it. we see the challenge every day. >> women have made great strides in congress, it still and has been historically such a male-dominated place. so, what do you -- in very practical sense, what do you see day-to-day? >> a male member who has young children, typically their children live with their spouse in their home district during the week. they're not having the mad rush to finish the vote and get to their child's school to pick up their son or daughter from school. are you all set? one thing i noticed for the first time, we have a women's bathroom right off of the floor. >> first time? >> first time 200 years. took some time. and there still is not a changing table in that bathroom, which i really could have used. >> and you asked for one? >> yes. and so, there are unique challenges.

>> how have the male members been? a lot of women. it happened to me, too. it was like you didn't want to talk that much about being a mom because the men might look at you as not taking your job seriously. has that gone away? >> i think there's been a generational shift. and for members our own generation, they're comfortable with their wives. and the wives may work at home. but they -- there's a comfort level for men who serve, who are older than us. 20, 30 years. we just remind them of their daughters. and they love their daughters. their daughters are living similar lives to us. >> just a final question for each of you. how is -- how has it changed from where you are, on this mother's day, from where your own mothers were? >> night and day? my mom was a mother to seven children. she was a stay-at-home mom. i think she should be sainted. she went back tonight school, earned her degree and became a

teacher. and i think largely because of what she did and the values she installed in me and what she taught me, i am where i am today. >> i have to agree. my mother's lessons of there's nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it, really informed my whole life. but my mom was among the few in her generation to actually work. and her mother works. i just have this long legacy of moms who work outside the home. so, i never considered anything else. what they've accomplished and what all the women before us have accomplished, makes everything we do possible. >> my mom, i don't think really can imagine that i am serving in congress. my mom had dropped out of college. her freshman year, when her dad passed away. and she was determined that her kids were going to go to college, graduate from college. and she sacrificed her entire life to give me that opportunity. and she told me, cathy, you can be anything you want to be. she's made me the person that i

am today. >> our thanks to all three on this mother's day. and now, we honor our fellow americans who serve and sacrifice. this week, the pentagon released the names of ten service members killed in afghanistan and kyrgystan. that's all for us today. thanks for sharing part of your sunday with us. check out "world news" with david muir tonight. and to all the moms out there, happy mother's day.

. >> the murder that's rocked the calaveras county community. this morning a twelve-year-old boy is accused of murder. and a hillside collapsing, taking nearly a dozen northern california homes with it. what's behind the sinking earth. >> good morning. from mt. tam you can see the low clouds and fog but it is disappearing quickly. we are warming up today, especially inland were we will talk about a stronger sea breeze